OPS/Gladstones claim to be heard at Guildford County Court

beamerguy

NotanotherPPCscam wrote: »

Not sure whether to laugh or cry...

...having effectively taken half a day off work to go down to Guildford and file my Court bundle (not helped by both SW Trains and Southern having a meltdown this morning), I got home from work tonight to find a letter from Gladstones dated yesterday with a copy of a Notice of Discontinuance for the first claim (the one where the deadline for Court bundle was 4pm today). Maybe that SRA investigation is starting to bite...?

Gladstones are a shower. These children, let's call them children, that is all they deserve ???? need to be clamped down on

I would again issue a severe complaint to the SRA as Gladstones are not fit to be members , they use the courts as if it's their own private public convenience. Plus the way they waste the courts time, as children they need a good spanking.

I would also copy in The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice

NotanotherPPCscam

Yes, SRA complaint is the next step.

NotanotherPPCscam

So an update. Had a copy of a Court Order from the Judge to Gladstones saying (paraphrased) “having read the claim file for the discontinued claim, I understand there is a second claim with substantially same facts. Please have Claimant confirm in writing to the Court by 4th Feb if you want to continue with the claim”.

I took this, optimistically, as the Judge giving them an easy way out of their illegal claim for the £60 add-on etc.

However Gladstones confirmed yesterday they are proceeding, so my claim for costs for the discontinued claim is going in tomorrow and I have to wait for the date for filing Court bundle for the second claim.

Will be interesting to see where this ends up. Hopefully another Court which rips GS a new one.

Coupon-mad

So my claim for costs for the discontinued claim is going in tomorrow

Head it up SUMMARY COSTS ASSESSMENT - TWO CLAIMS and include in it that even if the second claim is discontinued like the first was, as a self-represented litigant you have spent many hours of time on these cases.

Get a decent FULL 'Summary costs assessment' sent off asap and state in it that all this work was 'necessary' and your hourly rate is £xx, so your total is more than reasonable for handling two distinct claims and associated paperwork and deadlines and doesn't exceed the CPR cap of two-thirds of the amount that a firm of solicitors would have charged in preparing for what was potentially two hour-long hearings arising from two claims.

I posted about costs only this afternoon, and in more detail on 24th Jan:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76775982#Comment_76775982

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/76759005#Comment_76759005

Let's try to get costs for more posters this year. I want us to get this right and not be scuppered as often as people have been, in getting any more than just the bog standard £95 in 'standard costs' for attending a hearing.

You want your costs to be viewed as 'summarily assessed' - i.e. hearing or not.

beamerguy

I really wonder if Gladstones actually know what they are doing.

It is obvious that the judge will ask why they discontinued the first one and now a second claim with substantially the same facts.

My view is they have now committed themselves for a spanking and you for double costs.

John Davies of Gladstones, if he had the guts, should be answering to the judge but ..... he won't. He will send yet another "wet behind the ears" local rep who will probably get splattered by the judge

It is beyond belief that the SRA allow these clowns to operate

NotanotherPPCscam

So by way of update, I have now received OPS' witness statement, which is largely the usual generic garbage one would expect to see.   Particularly laughable comments are that:

1) they deny that the first Claim reference (the one they abandoned in January) is one of their cases and say that I need to provide more details than just the Claim number for them to trace it in their systems!!!! 

2) The WS says that all information is within the knowledge of the signatory unless stated otherwise - it then goes on to say " as he utilises the parking and did not attempt to read any Sign..... The motorist was not prevented from reviewing the terms and conditions prior to making use of the facilities, he chose not to review them." - I am not sure how the signatory personally knows that I did not attempt to ready any sign and that I chose not to review them?

They have also neatly fallen into the trap of trying to justify the add-on of the £60 as being for costs of pursuing recovery, thereby throwing the original £100 under the bus on Beavis principles as supported by DJ Grand in Southampton, as I will enjoy pointing out to the DJ when the hearing date is set.

The only question I have is in relation to the contract (I now have an unredacted version) - is there any legislative requirement as to who can sign on behalf of OPS?  As the signatory was not a Director or Company Secretary in 2016 (but was appointed as a Director in 2019, and has also now signed the WS, albeit with a completely different signature to the one on the contract!).

D_P_Dance

It looks as if they may have submitted an invalid contract.  .  I predict that they  are heading for another pasting in court.  Have you complained to the SRA?

https://www.sra.org.uk/

Nine times out of ten these tickets are scams, so consider complaining to your MP., it can cause the scammer extra costs and work, and in some cases, cancellation.

Parliament is well aware of the MO of these private parking companies, many of whom are former clampers, and on 15th March 2019 a Bill was enacted to curb the excesses of these shysters. Codes of Practice are being drawn up, an independent appeals service will be set up, and access to the DVLA's date base more rigorously policed, persistent offenders denied access to the DVLA database and unable to operate.

Hopefully life will become impossible for the worst of these scammers, but until this is done you should still complain to your MP, citing the new legislation.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2019/8/contents/enacted

Just as the clampers were finally closed down, so hopefully will many of these Private Parking Companies.

Fruitcake

With regards to contract signatories, the requirements are defined in the Companies Act 2006.

Have a look at my post on this thread, dated 27th August at 10.23. (Post numbers have been deleted following the MSE "upgrade". They are supposed to be re-instating them but at the moment time, date, and poster is the best we can do).

This was to do with parking at a different location, but the contract requirements still apply. Note that the contract must be with the landowner, (or flowing from the landowner via an agent, with a contract between the landowner and agent allowing the agent to form a contract with the scammers) that allows the scammers to issue scamvoices and issue court claims.

It must also be in date. If it has an end date or rolls over after, say a twelve month, then you require proof it was continued/rolled over and had not ended or been cancelled. This would in effect be something like a short contract stating the original contract has continued or been renewed.
Any omission should be challenged.

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6027099/fistral-beach-newquay-inital-parking-please-help/p5

Please post a copy of the alleged contract for us to look at.

Coupon-mad

That'll be GP then, one version of his signature has been posted by a Lewes victim here:
https://lewes.co.uk/forum/post/Parking_fine_in_car_park_outside_laura_ashley/223317

His signature differs between documents.  Those of us in Sussex have noticed.

This location in your case isn't a Sussex one is it?

Who is the other signatory of the contract, is that unredacted?  Notice that in the one in the link, OPS have signed their own contract at Eastgate Wharf  (no non-OPS signature) and that has been exposed in court, believe me!  So has the fact he wasn't a director at the time of signing.

NotanotherPPCscam

Contract attached - signed by GP and an employee of the estate agent managing the property (two of the employees of the estate agent are the directors of the company which actually own the property, per Companies House, so that side of things is legitimate albeit not Companies Act compliant).
Signature per WS also attached - no way they belong to same person.